The atheist is a frog in a well who does not truly "reason" and cannot truly "imagine", who has blinded his-/her-self from the possibilities. . “From a drop of water, a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic or a Niagara without having seen or heard of one or the other. So all life is a great chain, the nature of which is known whenever we are shown a single link to it.” - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, A Study in Scarlet.
wow, subhanAllah. this is one of those innate ideas that just needs someone to have put the words to it. thank you for posting this, akhi. Allah swt is far above.
Could somebody elaborate what he exactly means with that the problem lies in finding the solid soundness of the propositions and that most problems and debates arise from that ?
With respect, I think he is suggesting that the "solid soundness" of the propositions, refers to whatever explanation one uses to quantify or describe a proposition. So, if I am thinking correctly, the debates that people have in discussions regarding faith arise from a difference of opinions in the explanations of the aspects of a faith that people may have a challenge understanding, accepting or explaining. So one individual may explain it one way, and the other may explain it another, and though each may agree on the central issue at hand, their differing understandings, or explanations, or interpretations of it is where most of the conflict arises. I hope I helped, even a little. Peace!
@leon we cannot assume that the ultimate observer needs the same tools as us limited observers. By your line of thinking an observer would need to also be bound by time to witness cause and effect, but thats nonsensical since its established that God is beyond even time. So in conclusion when it comes to God's experience we cannot assert knowledge we dont have access to as necessary.
The thing is, my dear sheikh, that I can do the math to replicate the same understanding within my intellect regarding sub-atomic particles. However, when it comes to the questions of prophecy and theological understanding, I can never replicate that. Call me self-limiting all you want but from where I stand, it's self delusion that you're propagating; a notion that you can blindly trust a man and his understandings without any means of inquiry will and should get you a label of a lunatic and a fanatic.
Thank you for this thoughtful message, dear Imam.
What an educated presentation! Thank you for posting.
The atheist is a frog in a well who does not truly "reason" and cannot truly "imagine", who has blinded his-/her-self from the possibilities.
.
“From a drop of water, a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic or a Niagara without having seen or heard of one or the other. So all life is a great chain, the nature of which is known whenever we are shown a single link to it.” - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, A Study in Scarlet.
wow, subhanAllah. this is one of those innate ideas that just needs someone to have put the words to it. thank you for posting this, akhi.
Allah swt is far above.
Good!
Could somebody elaborate what he exactly means with that the problem lies in finding the solid soundness of the propositions and that most problems and debates arise from that ?
With respect, I think he is suggesting that the "solid soundness" of the propositions, refers to whatever explanation one uses to quantify or describe a proposition. So, if I am thinking correctly, the debates that people have in discussions regarding faith arise from a difference of opinions in the explanations of the aspects of a faith that people may have a challenge understanding, accepting or explaining. So one individual may explain it one way, and the other may explain it another, and though each may agree on the central issue at hand, their differing understandings, or explanations, or interpretations of it is where most of the conflict arises. I hope I helped, even a little. Peace!
regardless if something exists outside of the material world, it would still require senses and intellect to obbserve
Yea would reason be enough for u?
Your own consciousness is not part of the material world, that’s why it’s called the hard problem of consciousness!! Do you deny your conciousness?
@@bangbaba7395 no brother it is because the conciousness is not part of the materiel world that it is called the hard problem of conciousness
@leon we cannot assume that the ultimate observer needs the same tools as us limited observers. By your line of thinking an observer would need to also be bound by time to witness cause and effect, but thats nonsensical since its established that God is beyond even time. So in conclusion when it comes to God's experience we cannot assert knowledge we dont have access to as necessary.
Sense in reasoning, yes. Sense in 5 senses, no, otherwise you'll have the problem of infinite regression which makes no sense.
The thing is, my dear sheikh, that I can do the math to replicate the same understanding within my intellect regarding sub-atomic particles. However, when it comes to the questions of prophecy and theological understanding, I can never replicate that. Call me self-limiting all you want but from where I stand, it's self delusion that you're propagating; a notion that you can blindly trust a man and his understandings without any means of inquiry will and should get you a label of a lunatic and a fanatic.
There's no blind trust - he came with 23 years of evidence my dear brother.
Yes you believe things. So do Christians and Jews and Zoroastrians and Raelians and Mitrans. And your beliefs are just as rational as theirs are.
I may be goin to hell bt as for ur "70 proofs"...well I dnt see ANYBDY IN A RUSH TO GET TO HEAVEN! I see u eating ur veggies!